The uploaded essay compellingly frames the glossary not as a passive dictionary, but as a topological map: a relational apparatus through which terms such as LexicalGravity, RecursiveAutophagia, SemanticHardening, and TopolexicalSovereignty become instruments for thinking processes that conventional vocabularies cannot adequately contain . Its central proposition is that new terminology earns legitimacy only when it emerges from conceptual impasse, generates internal relations, and remains operational in practice. Accordingly, expressions such as ArchiveFatigue or CatabolicPruning do not merely embellish discourse; they condense institutional exhaustion, selective preservation, and metabolic renewal into usable analytic forms. The case study of this dense postdigital lexicon demonstrates how a field may be assembled through clusters, tensions, and procedural metaphors rather than through isolated definitions: geological sedimentation, biological transformation, political friction, and epistemic latency become the grammar of a discipline still coming into being. Yet this ambition carries unavoidable risks. Jargon may become gatekeeping, and premature semantic hardening may freeze concepts before collective use has tested their durability. For that reason, the strongest glossary remains versioned, contestable, and hospitable to revision. Ultimately, glossary-building is an act of lexical sovereignty: the shared right to name the world otherwise, not to close meaning, but to create the conditions under which thought can move with greater precision, responsibility, and imaginative force.